Erector spinae plane versus fascia iliaca block after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial comparing analgesic effectiveness and motor block.

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound-guided supra-inguinal fascia iliaca block (FIB) provides effective analgesia after total hip arthroplasty (THA) but is complicated by high rates of motor block. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a promising motor-sparing technique. In this study, we tested the analgesic superiority of the FIB over ESPB and associated motor impairment.

METHODS

In this randomized, observer-blinded clinical trial, patients scheduled for THA under spinal anesthesia were randomly assigned to preoperatively receive either the ultrasound-guided FIB or ESPB. The primary outcome was morphine consumption 24 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes were pain scores, assessment of sensory and motor block, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and other complications, and development of chronic post-surgical pain.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients completed the study. No statistically significant differences in morphine consumption at 24 h (P = 0.676) or pain scores were seen at any time point. The FIB produced more reliable sensory block in the femoral nerve (P = 0.001) and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (P = 0.018) distributions. However, quadriceps motor strength was better preserved in the ESPB group than in the FIB group (P = 0.002). No differences in hip adduction motor strength (P = 0.253), side effects, or incidence of chronic pain were seen between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ESPBs may be a promising alternative to FIBs for postoperative analgesia after THA. The ESPB and FIB offer similar opioid-sparing benefits in the first 24 h after surgery; however, ESPBs result in less quadriceps motor impairment.